In all honesty, I've never been convinced of the biological determination of sexual orientation. The few studies that "seem to" confirm this are not empirically substantive. The failure of identical twin studies to prove a genetic imperative is a serious deterrent to my signing on to such a belief. However, if there are empirically-proven intrauterine as well as genetic precursors to sexual-orientation-associated temperament, for instance (bearing in mind how difficult temperament is to measure, let alone prove), then I am personally more likely to subscribe to the notion that one's sexual predilections and tendencies can be influenced by prenatal factors. Intrauterine hormone exposure may provide a link to such a sensibility; this is the angle – if one exists - most likely to sway my own opinion at this point, though still not toward a so-called "gay gene". What are some biopsychiatrists saying, and how does this relate to Dr. Peter D'Adamo's determinations of Genotype?

Prenatal exposure to one or the other pole of sex hormones has been being linked by some researchers in biopsychiatry to sexual orientation/preference/identification for well over a decade now, as but one of several factors of influence. A couple of days ago I saw a paragraph in an online textbook stating that:
- homosexual men may exhibit lower levels of circulatory androgens than heterosexuals do, and that
- the effective presence of androgens in prenatal life contributes toward a sexual predilection toward females for all, while
- a "deficiency of androgens - or tissue insensitivity to these" may lead one to be oriented toward males. (Kaplan & Sadock's Synopsis of Psychiatry).
I've also seen a study linking the opposite factor - HIGH prenatal androgen exposure - to male homosexuality. (You've been warned: Not only is acceptance of the "science" NOT universal; even the "convinced" scientists can disagree with one another.)

This caught my eye because Dr. Peter D'Adamo, in his The Genotype Diet, treats of D2: D4 (the prenatal sex-hormonally influenced ratio of index finger length to that of the ring finger) as a determinant of Genotype within his 6-type system. He writes that this ratio is "an excellent marker for sex hormone exposure. A longer ring finger means you encountered more androgens in the womb (androgens are a testosterone precursor); a long index finger means you faced higher levels of estrogen."

According to numerous respected biopsychiatry sources, D2: D4 does somewhat correlate with sexual orientation. Longer D2 (index finger) is a marker of prenatal dominance of estrogen exposure; longer D4 (ring finger) of that of androgens. Females with high androgen exposure, and males with high estrogen exposure, are apparently likelier than most to experience same-sex attractions. (I haven't yet seen a good explanation as to WHY/HOW: The "route".)

Here are some summarised findings of D'Adamo with respect to D2: D4 prevalence within the six genotype populations, per The Genotype Diet (2007):

GT-1 Hunters tend toward longer D4 on both hands
GT-2 Gatherers tend toward longer D2 on both hands. Also often seen is hand-asymmetry for which finger's length is greater (i.e., a difference between the two hands), a factor other researchers correlate with deviations from heterosexuality.
GT-3 Teachers may tend toward longer D2 on both hands. Or, like GT2, asymmetry between hands.
GT4 -Explorers: Longer D4 on both hands, especially among females. From another page, some likelihood that men are more prone to longer D2, women to longer D4.
GT5- Warriors tend toward symmetry between hands.
GT6: Nomads tend toward longer D2 on both hands for females, longer D4 on both hands for men.

IF D2: D4 were always and only a result of prenatal androgenic/estrogenic dominance, and IF this predominance were a surefire determinant of sexual orientation, we'd be able to predict someone's sexual preference by measuring his/her D2: D4! In that case, and only in that case, we'd expect to see – per Dr. D'Adamo's correlations of D2: D4 ratios with Genotype – homosexuality somewhat more common among:

This might automatically imply (if all bloodtypes and genotypes have no gender-preponderance) that the O bloodtype population (which contains only Hunters, Gatherers, and Explorers) is more likely to be associated with homosexuality than are the other bloodtypes.

IF you subscribe to the Genotype system, AND to the prenatal androgen/estrogen theory regarding sexual orientation, a Genotype/sexual-orientation link has interesting implications, including that certain diets and fitness-practices could be statistically associated with greater or lesser health among homosexuals. If, in the end, homosexuality were to definitively prove to be related to Genotype, sexual preference would be an important datum to consider in the "strength-testing" of genotype for type-determination and in diet/nutrient/fitness prescription according to D'Adamo's increasingly popular genotyping software, SWAMI. This is where my interest was piqued. Conclusive data here would be revolutionary, to say the least.

Feel free to supply any related bloodtype/genotype-related information you may have come across on this compelling subject.

Here we are, Baby Boomers. How’s your health?
I’ve attributed my good health to a hardy genotype (Nomad), compliant diet/supplementation, and use of pure essential oils in every possible way. I’m finding out, as I look around at my ailing peers, however, that there are a few VERY high risk factors.

One is the regular/frequent use of distilled spirits. People who enjoy cocktails show far more wear and tear in their fifties than the rest of us do. You’d think it’s mostly liver ailments, but I notice that their overall immunity stinks, they can’t sleep, and they don’t manage stress well. And that’s just the beginning. If you drink, switch to a bloodtype/genotype-compliant wine or beer. If you really miss the cocktails, you can cut back gradually by using water/soda more liberally at cocktail hour, enjoying that ONE diluted drink, switching to wine at dinnertime. (Eventually take wine-only at cocktail hour if you maintain that tradition.) If you’re under fifty, start now so you won’t be using spirits at all in midlife, or you’ll be sicklier than necessary, for sure.

Another risk factor is chemicals, such as those found in diet foods/diet sodas. Rather than find yourself a plaintiff in some class action suit in midlife, or wondering why you have undiagnosible vertigo (often reversible when NutraSweet usage is stopped), switch to healthy sweeteners, for instance, recommended for your blood- or geno-type.

Third: Piling up Rx meds is an American pastime. On any given day, a Baby Boomer might be taking drugs for several conditions, such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, ulcers, menopause, a cold (wrongly taking antibiotics), and insomnia.
This is NOT to be compared to the healthy person’s taking numerous supplements every day such as multivitamins, multiminerals, fiber, omega oils and a probiotic. Rx drugs come with numerous side effects, nutrient depletions, possible adverse reactions, warnings and contraindications. There could be a piper to be paid for this layering of powerful synthetic chemicals, with conditions that most MD’s will never take the time to associate with multiple medication use.

My advice is (1) that you research, yourself, each and every med you’re prescribed, and, if it fits and you end up taking it, that you use supplements to amply replenish whichever nutrients are depleted by the drug in question. (2) If you experience side effects from a medication, do NOT unquestionably take another Rx drug to reduce these effects. You might ask your MD to simply lower the dosage of the original drug, switch you to another drug, or time the drug’s administration differently; or you might investigate or use nutritional supplements to quell the side effects. Take the time, people. That “innocent” second drug will have its own side effects and depletions…and it’s a never-ending pile-up your pharmaceutically-oriented MD may not be inclined to prevent. (3) Once your condition is stabilized on a given Rx med, look into nutrient (i.e., diet and supplements) and lifestyle changes that might enable you to take a lower dosage or to eventually wean yourself completely. Many Boomers are amazed at how much slack, for instance, a good multimineral, Stress-B-Complex and melatonin can take up! If you cannot, however, forego a given medication, it’s understandable. But try to keep the number of Rx’s to a minimum.

Fourth is the obvious cigarette smoking. I’ll say no more than that it’s like drinking dirty, poisoned water --- only it’s what you put in your lungs. Who doesn’t know this?

Fifth is sexual stupidity. Maybe it was years ago. Sometimes it’s ongoing. I live in San Francisco where some people do/have done dumb stuff. There are consequences.

Sixth is Bad Parenting. If your parenting was lazy, you may now have teenaged or young adult children with knotty problems that stress you out beyond measure. “Good-enough” parenting yields the more normal “stressful-enough” result, but those midlifers who’d cut corners as disciplinarians have unruly progeny and all sorts of stress-caused conditions, all of which are serious quality-of-life destroyers. No one put it to us correctly when we were in our twenties and thirties. No one warned us: “If you don’t stick to your highest principles here, you may think the consequences will come home to roost when you’re still feeling as vibrant and energetic as you do now, but: They’ll hit you when your joints creak and you’re career-exhausted and you don’t have the resilience you now do. You’ve GOT to raise responsible, respectful adults for THAT day.”

You may find yourself described in only one of the above categories: See what you can do about it. We’re all going to die – some of us young, some of us old. If you can live without myriad health conditions until you die, wouldn’t that be easier? If your lifestyle is high-flying, high-rolling, on the edge, and you like it that way, then someone probably made you read this. Think it over.

Not everyone cares a whole lot about his/her health; a reality many health-conscious people find shocking, even unbelievable. But it’s a fact. If you know someone who mocks the natural approach of diet/supplement/herb/lifestyle/fitness or any element thereof, don’t nag. Accept. In our fifties we understand my late grandmother’s saying, “A leopard don’t change its spots,” with regard to some of our peers’ ways (and some of our own).

Oh, and see Death differently, too: Somewhat more matter-of-factly. Some of us check out sooner, some later. People make choices and – another old saying - that’s what makes horse racing.

From the Blog Journal, 20 March 2010
* * * * * *
The Blood Type Diet doesn't, for me, constitute an "ism". I don't follow it as a religion, nor do I feel the need to "go to confession" about my personal use of it. But vegetarianism frequently inspires that type of allegiance, and one wonders why.

People of blood type A seem to thrive on modified vegetarian diets. One would understand if it were such A's who were doing the proselytizing and genuflecting. On the contrary, I've known of O's who are obsessed with "Save the Animals" principles which they passionately extend to their own diets (though not to their shoe, belt, or purse selections!). Their health suffers, but No Doctor Is Going To Get Them To Kill Animals, dad-gummit!

An old O friend called today, telling me about her vegan cousin who espouses her diet religiously and has forced it on her ten-year-old daughter who is odd/spooky, fat, and friendless. Anything, it seems, to Save the Cattle, all the way to child-sacrifice! I told my friend (who actually lives in Philadelphia), the classic story of Benjamin Franklin who, as an animal-loving vegetarian went out on a friend's boat and watched him catch and eviscerate fish. Noting the presence of so many fish in the bellies of the caught fish, Franklin reported, "I figured that if they can eat each other, I can eat them, too," so ending Franklin's dietary religion.

My teenaged A niece eats fish and is otherwise a vegetarian. She's not a missionary about it; she's just, enviably, extraordinarily astute about her own health. She has no qualms about handling meat; in fact she enjoys cooking it for the rest of the family. She doesn't subscribe to Vegetarian Times or Yoga Journal, and it seems she's not exposed to any vegan-evangelism. Her O sister loves animals and eats meat.

I think about the archetypal O carnivore and his love for animals. After all, it was the prehistoric O hunter who first tamed dogs, using the latter as hunting assistants; if anyone developed close relationships with animals, it was those predatory O's. Historically, respect for animals has never required that one not eat them. The inconvenient truth is that we humans have four canine teeth that clearly demonstrate our equipment to eat meat.

Ironically, some of the strongest pro-animal-nature-habitat politics and money come from hunters. Profoundly inspiring books about the human/nature interface also emanate from that community (see titles below). If I'm going to revere Nature, I'll do so while honestly accepting food-chain reality.

A few hunting/nature books:

Eaton, Randall L., PhD, The Sacred Hunt: Hunting as a Sacred Path: An Anthology
Houston, Pam, ed., Women and Hunting
Martin, Calvin Luther, In the Spirit of the Earth
Swan, James A., In Defense of Hunting

It's rare that I find myself eating a lamb leg roast or a rack of chops, though I do roast chops or tenderloin at home, and I also like lamb burgers. A number of San Francisco restaurants are serving lamb burgers now; it's definitely a trend.

B's: Do keep your eye open for Rabbit. Especially à la Moutarde in French/Burgundian restaurants, served in a copper terrine, generously sauced. This is so...soothing. It may be the ultimate B comfort food. I've tried making rabbit myself. I dunno. The bunnies this prime butcher has tend to be skinny: Very little meat on the bones. So it's a strictly restaurant option for me. If you can find a good place to order it, go often and bliss out!

We're deep into game season. Go somewhere top notch and order roast loin of venison with a port/berry reduction. Maybe you'll have dreams about your ancestors and their fire-roasted gazelles.

Recently on the dadamo Forum, a few folks have been obsessed with the notion of the oral administration of essential oils. In France, in particular, this is a major modality: Aromamedicine, as practiced by approximately 20% of all MD’s there. While many practitioners in other countries – and increasingly in the US, myself included – do compound such medicines, the marketplace is increasingly filling up with excellent aromamedical supplements, safe for those consumers who do not make their own. The Whole Foods Market near my San Francisco home carries cinnamon caps, oregano caps, peppermint caps, ginger caps and/or syrup, and, in its “antioxidant” dept., a couple of powerful blends by Gaia Herbs and New Planet that may include rosemary, marjoram et al (a superb vehicle for taking antioxidants, btw). And there’ll be plenty more products, I’m sure.

Using essential oils diluted in vegetable oils for medicinal use as ointments and linaments, as well as in bathing media (including salts) is a long accepted method of taking them. They are rapidly absorbed into the skin and beyond. Chest rubs, belly rubs, pelvic rubs are well established practices. Overall massage, complexion products such as moisturizers, masques, cleansers – there are many books to assist the newcomer in the crafting of these – are all options to consider. Various hygiene products (including oral hygiene) often include tea tree oil for its antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral properties. There are even tea tree oil-saturated tampons for vaginal insertion to treat yeast infection. Tea tree oil douche solutions may also be out there by now.

While “aromatherapy” is usually assumed to be strictly psychoactive or mood-altering, (it certainly is that), note that synthetic fragrances can be liked or disliked, too. The inhalation of PURE and preferably organic essential oils, however, is of decidedly pharmacologic value. Some essential oils, such as rosemary and basil, for instance, are mental stimulants suited to say, offices, while ylang ylang and mandarin are relaxants, excellent for unwinding at day’s end or under stress. The shower gel and bath oil department of your health shop will surely reflect these and other uses.

Aromamedicine offers one particularly exciting and relatively unknown feature amongst its benefits: The oils themselves are diagnostic tools. An uncertain diagnosis can be fine-tuned depending upon the oil favored by the patient when offered various oils – with known properties - for smelling. The gravitation to decidedly estrogenic substances, for instance, can indicate a female hormonal component in the patient’s current state. A patient complaining of chest discomfort of uncertain origin may seem to like decidedly peptic (digestion-assisting) as opposed to, say, cardiotonic or bronchopulmonary-specific oils, thus providing an important clue for the directing of the history. Of course, this facet of aromamedicine can be practiced only by those with broad familiarity with essential oils and their chemistry/characteristics. There is much overlap, too, e.g., a cholagogic essence such as thyme, is also a powerhouse of an antibiotic/antifungal/antiparasitic/antiviral agent, so the sample offered must be carefully chosen to correct for possible confusion, further the differential diagnosis, and be presented systematically to the patient.

For most folks entry into the vast aromatherapeutic universe is via tea tree oil for the instant cure of athlete’s foot, lavender oil for instant relief of kitchen burns or sunburn, peppermint tea to calm gastric distress, or chamomile tea for shaky nerves. I encourage the curious to sniff those tiny tester bottles displayed for that purpose at the health shop and ask the salesperson to direct you to the literature and possible applications of the ones you fancy.